Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 23 Mar 1982

Vol. 333 No. 2

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Constitutional Amendments.

18.

asked the Taoiseach if the Government propose to bring forward legislative proposals to amend the Constitution by introducing what is known as the pro-life amendment; and if it is proposed to hold a referendum on the matter.

19.

asked the Taoiseach his proposals on any constitutional amendments which he intends to introduce.

With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle I propose to take Questions Nos. 18 and 19 together.

The Government intend to bring forward legislation which will enable the holding of a referendum this year on the question of amending the Constitution so as specifically to protect the right to life of the unborn child. The form of the amendment is at present being considered.

No other constitutional amendments are proposed at present.

Will a referendum be held this year?

That is the intention.

In the light of the expense involved to the State of holding a referendum, would the Taoiseach agree that there are other Articles in the Constitution which require amendment? Would he consider at the same time holding a referendum on other Articles which at this stage are either out of date or causing difficulties in other areas of our national life?

I have a specific commitment, as had my predecessor, to bring forward legislation to enable a constitutional referendum to take place on this specific issue without regard to any other matters.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Would the Taoiseach avail of the opportunity to amend the Constitution to remedy the absurd position regarding bail which needs badly to be rectified?

I am aware that there is a fairly specific difference of opinion among lawyers as to whether a constitutional amendment is necessary in that regard, but I would be prepared to listen to the Deputy on it.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Would the Taoiseach agree that, because of the difference of opinion between lawyers, as he says, the decision of the Supreme Court which lets at large every criminal who should be locked up should be rectified and that he should avail of this opportunity when he is bringing in this referendum also to include the most important question of bail?

Certainly that is worthy of consideration, although I think the Deputy is aware that a fairly considerable body of legal opinion is to the effect that this could be achieved by legislation without a constitutional amendment.

(Cavan-Monaghan): As this argument goes on and these legal questions are being decided people are being allowed out on bail who should be locked up pending trial, and some of them over the last years have committed the most horrific crimes, including murder, under unspeakable conditions.

I am inclined to agree with the Deputy, as most other Members would be, but there is a need for a tightening up of some of the laws, certainly the penal laws.

(Cavan-Monaghan): The Taoiseach seems to be prevaricating. Would he not avail of this opportunity to clarify the position and to restore the law to what it was before the Supreme Court decision?

The Deputy will understand that the questions down to me are on one very specific matter on which I have given an undertaking and which is sui generis. The question he is raising now is about bail, a very different legal and constitutional area. I must ask him to accept my reply that this will be considered.

(Interruptions.)

Deputy Quinn has been waiting patiently.

Like Deputy Fitzpatrick and other Deputies I could list items which could usefully be put into such a referendum, but since the Taoiseach is briefed on only this specific question could he indicate to the House, having regard to all the other items of tidying-up which could usefully be done to our Constitution, why the Government have made this specific commitment to hold a referendum on this issue? Why has that item been given this type of attention?

Because it it a matter of very widespread concern on which wide views are very deeply held throughout the country, about which I was approached prior to the last general election, about which I gave a specific undertaking in the context of that general election and on that basis I now feel committed to implementing it in this Dáil.

I respect and understand the Taoiseach's sincerity in this regard——

——but would he agree that, if the question of abortion is illegal in this country at present and no proposals exist to legalise it, in terms of priority regarding the amendments of our Constitution, matters such as Deputy Fitzpatrick has raised, the question of land legislation and so on, would rank equal to these to which the Taoiseach has given a specific commitment? What was the thinking in the order of priority that led the Taoiseach to give this commitment on this issue?

It is not a question of priorities. I think the Deputy will accept that, whether or not we decide to engage in something as major and fundamental as a Constitution reform, it cannot be dealt with by way of question and answer across this House. These matters require very deep, earnest and careful consideration. With regard to the other matter on which we propose to have a referendum, that was brought up very specifically as an election issue and, therefore, has that priority in my mind. I am not saying that it is any more urgent than the others.

Deputy Gemma Hussey

The Taoiseach has been replying to my question.

I am sorry, Deputy, you did not indicate that you intended asking a supplementary. I looked at you three times.

You should look at me a fourth time.

Certainly you are not making your presence felt.

In view of the commitment given by the Taoiseach to introduce legislation for a constitutional amendment this year, would he agree that at least as important, in view of this amendment to the Constitution, are other aspects such as the study of sex education in schools, the provision for unmarried mothers, legislation to abolish illegitimacy and reviewing family planning legislation in this area? It seems that to undertake a specific commitment this year on a constitutional amendment of the kind we are discussing without urgent attention to those areas is putting the cart before the horse.

These are matters which the Deputy may press as she thinks fit in this House as our business proceeds, but this other is a specific electoral undertaking by me and my party which we feel we are in honour bound to implement.

Are we to accept that there is no proposed action in any of these areas?

This is a constitutional referendum by us but it is not mutually exclusive of any other issue which the Deputy may wish to raise at any time in the House, but most of the things she has raised would not involve constitutional amendments.

The Taoiseach seemed to concentrate his reply on Question No. 18 and to ignore Question No. 19, which is a broad question on any proposals he has as to constitutional amendment. The question of bail goes back——

The Deputy may not have heard the latter part of my reply which says that no other constitutional amendments are proposed at present.

Do we take it from that that the problems indicated by Deputy Fitzpatrick in regard to bail, which go back to 1966, the problem with regard to the possibility of need for a constitutional referendum on citizenship or extending rights to British citizens to vote here are to be brushed aside or is any thought to be given to them or any proposal to be brought forward in regard to them?

I have no specific proposals for any other constitutional amendments at the moment.

I want to clear a point. The Taoiseach is reported as having said in the US that he was not in favour of piecemeal changing of the Constitution. Is that correct.

I said in the US that I did not believe that we should tinker with our Constitution in advance of some major overhaul of the Constitution in the context of some solution to the Northern Ireland problem. I was thinking in terms of the legal and constitutional implications of some new political structures covering this island as a whole, and in that context I did not believe that we should tinker with our Constitution in advance of such a situation and in relation to such a situation.

He must make up his mind that he is going to tinker with it and when he makes up his mind he will change it to suit himself. Would it not be better to have a constitutional committee to examine the Constitution and to make proposals?

The only thing I can say——

Would he look at the 1937 Constitution?

Would the Taoiseach not agree that there are constitutional changes required for the sake of our domestic situation which bear no relevance to our relationship with either the United Kingdom or Northern Ireland? In the light of the concern about a variety of issues expressed this afternoon by Deputies, would the Taoiseach reconsider his attitude and in particular reconsider the establishment within the next three or four weeks of an all-party committee on the Constitution so that this matter may be dealt with by the Oireachtas and not left in a cubby hole where nobody is willing to touch it?

The previous Government made a great song and dance about setting up a committee to carry out a review of the Constitution and, as far as I can see from the papers available to me, absolutely nothing was done during that time.

Would the Taoiseach indicate what papers suggest that to him, given that the committee have had a number of meetings and have already tackled a number of Articles of the Constitution? To what items in the papers is he referring when he makes that extraordinary statement?

The committee in question had a couple of desultory meetings at which they did nothing.

That is not what the Taoiseach said, nor is it the case. The Taoiseach knows it is not the case and he is deliberately misleading the House.

I will start exposing more fraud as time goes on.

As the Taoiseach has indicated that the only issue to be dealt with in an amendment to the Constitution would be that which comes under the heading of "pro-life", would he consider in the same referendum and under the same heading including in the Constitution a total prohibition on capital punishment?

My commitment is to the amendment I have mentioned. I repeat that at this stage I have no other Constitutional amendment under consideration.

I understood the Taoiseach's commitment was to a "pro-life" amendment. Surely that would include a prohibition on capital punishment?

Can I take it from what the Taoiseach says that not only does he intend to tell the house nothing but that he also intends to do nothing during the life of this Government?

Questions Nos. 20 and 21 postponed.

Barr
Roinn